On 11.02.23 11:24, Neil C Smith wrote:
The text mentions sig testing but there are no checkboxes for that. This
creates an uncertainly whether or not someone read the manual or skipped to the
boxes.
We've always had that problem, though. Part of me thinks that if a
PMC member doesn't know what they're required to do before voting, we
have bigger issues .. :-).
true.
In some ways I like the succinctness.
learned a new word. I do like succinctness too!
Again, that's a problem we've always had. I wouldn't say that's
noise, just prompting other voters to the level of checking they might
do? We could add an additional info bit at the bottom that could be
optionally filled out?
It doesn't change the validity of votes, though, nor change the fact
that it's really that level of testing on RCs that's most useful.
Assuming we don't get any last minute major issue, 17-rc3 and 17 are
identical - I would hope most people on dev@ have already done the "i
opened some RL <insert language> projects and worked with the release
for the rest of the day" part! And the "I've built from source" part
for that matter. The vote is not the time to find problems there.
good point! Although I do test the RCs a little bit, I usually run dev
builds during rc phase due to various reasons (testing PRs etc).
I guess the reason I felt to have to test the VCs in past was because it
feels a bit wrong to +1 something without testing it properly, no matter
that it is (hopefully) identical to the final RC.
best regards,
michael
Best wishes,
Neil
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
